21 Conn. App. 91 - Pac v. Upjohn Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
14 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 33 U.S.C. § 1251 (Alternative Water Sources Act of 2000) · 33 U.S.C. § 1311 · 33 U.S.C. § 1342 · 33 U.S.C. § 1362
Relies on Environmental Protection Agency v. California Ex Rel. State Water Resources Control Board · State v. Magnano · Mianus River Preservation Committee v. Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Any person who . . . violates any provision of this chapter, or section 22a-6 or 22a-7 shall be assessed a civil penalty not to exceed twenty-five thousand dollars . . . for each offense. Each violation shall be a separate and distinct offense and, in case of a continuing violation, each day's continuance thereof shall be deemed to be a separate and distinct offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“legislative history of 22a-438 . . . convince[s] us that the forfeiture statute was meant to apply to any administrative order issued under the authority of section 446k.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“it would defy reason if dischargers could violate administrative orders and not be penalized under General Statutes § 22a-438 for their past conduct.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.